From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Stephen Zhang <starzhangzsd@gmail.com>
Cc: Andreas Gruenbacher <agruenba@redhat.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
Johannes.Thumshirn@wdc.com, ming.lei@redhat.com,
hsiangkao@linux.alibaba.com, csander@purestorage.com,
colyli@fnnas.com, linux-block@vger.kernel.org,
linux-bcache@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
zhangshida@kylinos.cn
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] block: prevent race condition on bi_status in __bio_chain_endio
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2025 07:14:03 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20251203061403.GA16604@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANubcdWBF5tCfrutAOiUkFaZb=9s4=bMKzi7dSwQxTGbC_3_1Q@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Dec 03, 2025 at 11:09:36AM +0800, Stephen Zhang wrote:
>
> I’ve been reconsidering the two approaches for the upcoming patch revision.
> Essentially, we’re comparing two methods:
> A:
> if (bio->bi_status)
> parent->bi_status = bio->bi_status;
> B:
> if (bio->bi_status)
> cmpxchg(&parent->bi_status, 0, bio->bi_status);
>
> Both appear correct, but B seems a little bit redundant here.
A is not correct. You at least needs READ_ONCE/WRITE_ONCE here.
B solves all these issues.
> Upon further reflection, I’ve noticed a subtle difference:
> A unconditionally writes to parent->bi_status when bio->bi_status is non-zero,
> regardless of the current value of parent->bi_status.
> B uses cmpxchg to only update parent->bi_status if it is still zero.
>
> Thus, B could avoid unnecessary writes in cases where parent->bi_status has
> already been set to a non-zero value.
The unnecessary writes don't really matter, we're in an error slow path
here.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-12-03 6:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-12-01 9:04 [PATCH v4 0/3] Fix bio chain related issues zhangshida
2025-12-01 9:04 ` [PATCH v4 1/3] bcache: fix improper use of bi_end_io zhangshida
2025-12-01 9:04 ` [PATCH v4 2/3] block: prohibit calls to bio_chain_endio zhangshida
2025-12-01 9:34 ` Andreas Gruenbacher
2025-12-04 1:17 ` Stephen Zhang
2025-12-01 9:04 ` [PATCH v4 3/3] block: prevent race condition on bi_status in __bio_chain_endio zhangshida
2025-12-01 10:22 ` Andreas Gruenbacher
2025-12-01 11:25 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-12-01 13:07 ` Andreas Gruenbacher
2025-12-02 5:48 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-12-02 21:15 ` Andreas Gruenbacher
2025-12-03 1:51 ` Stephen Zhang
2025-12-03 3:09 ` Stephen Zhang
2025-12-03 4:34 ` Caleb Sander Mateos
2025-12-03 6:14 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20251203061403.GA16604@lst.de \
--to=hch@lst.de \
--cc=Johannes.Thumshirn@wdc.com \
--cc=agruenba@redhat.com \
--cc=colyli@fnnas.com \
--cc=csander@purestorage.com \
--cc=hsiangkao@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=linux-bcache@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ming.lei@redhat.com \
--cc=starzhangzsd@gmail.com \
--cc=zhangshida@kylinos.cn \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.